On 06.11.2018 0:30, Rob Herring wrote: > On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 11:54:47PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> Add device-tree binding that describes CPU frequency-scaling hardware >> found on NVIDIA Tegra20/30 SoC's. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> .../cpufreq/nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq.txt | 96 +++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..a8023ea7a99f >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ >> +Binding for NVIDIA Tegra20 CPUFreq >> +================================== >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- clocks: Must contain an entry for each entry in clock-names. >> + See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details. >> +- clock-names: Must include the following entries: >> + - pll_x: main-parent for CPU clock, must be the first entry >> + - intermediate: intermediate-parent for CPU clock >> + - cclk: the CPU clock >> +- operating-points-v2: See ../bindings/opp/opp.txt for details. >> +- #cooling-cells: Should be 2. See ../thermal/thermal.txt for details. >> + >> +For each opp entry in 'operating-points-v2' table: >> +- opp-supported-hw: Two bitfields indicating: >> + On Tegra20: >> + 1. CPU process ID mask >> + 2. SoC speedo ID mask >> + >> + On Tegra30: >> + 1. CPU process ID mask >> + 2. CPU speedo ID mask >> + >> + A bitwise AND is performed against these values and if any bit >> + matches, the OPP gets enabled. >> + >> +- opp-microvolt: CPU voltage triplet. >> + >> +Optional properties: >> +- cpu-supply: Phandle to the CPU power supply. >> +- core-supply: Phandle to the CORE power supply. >> +- rtc-supply: Phandle to the RTC power supply, required only for Tegra20. >> + >> +Voltage supply requirements: >> +- Tegra20: >> + CORE and RTC regulators must be coupled using the regulator-coupled-with >> + property and regulator-coupled-max-spread property must be set to no >> + more than 170mV. >> + >> + See ../regulator/regulator.txt for more detail about the properties. >> + >> +- Tegra30: >> + CORE and CPU regulators must be coupled using the regulator-coupled-with >> + property and regulator-coupled-max-spread property must be set to no >> + more than 300mV. Each of CORE and CPU regulators must set >> + regulator-max-step-microvolt property to no more than 100mV. >> + >> + See ../regulator/regulator.txt for more detail about the properties. >> + >> + >> +Example: >> + regulators { >> + cpu_reg: regulator0 { >> + regulator-name = "vdd_cpu"; >> + }; >> + >> + core_reg: regulator1 { >> + regulator-name = "vdd_core"; >> + regulator-coupled-with = <&rtc_reg>; >> + regulator-coupled-max-spread = <170000>; >> + }; >> + >> + rtc_reg: regulator2 { >> + regulator-name = "vdd_rtc"; >> + regulator-coupled-with = <&core_reg>; >> + regulator-coupled-max-spread = <170000>; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + cpu0_opp_table: opp_table0 { >> + compatible = "operating-points-v2"; >> + >> + opp@456000000 { >> + clock-latency-ns = <125000>; >> + opp-microvolt = <825000 825000 1125000>; >> + opp-supported-hw = <0x03 0x0001>; >> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <456000000>; >> + }; >> + >> + ... >> + }; >> + >> + cpus { >> + cpu@0 { >> + compatible = "arm,cortex-a9"; >> + clocks = <&tegra_car TEGRA20_CLK_PLL_X>, >> + <&tegra_car TEGRA20_CLK_PLL_P>, >> + <&tegra_car TEGRA20_CLK_CCLK>; >> + clock-names = "pll_x", "intermediate", "cclk"; > > I still object to having clocks (and supplies) which don't reflect the > h/w and are documented in the CA9 TRM. > >> + operating-points-v2 = <&cpu0_opp_table>; >> + cpu-supply = <&cpu_reg>; >> + core-supply = <&core_reg>; >> + rtc-supply = <&rtc_reg>; > > Supplies are suspect too, but perhaps supplies and power domains are > beyond the scope of the TRM and part of the physical design. Is it possible to have a "firmware" device-tree node specifically for cpufreq driver? Something like this: cpufreq { compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-cpufreq"; clocks = <&tegra_car TEGRA20_CLK_PLL_X>, <&tegra_car TEGRA20_CLK_PLL_P>; clock-names = "pll_x", "intermediate"; }; We may also need a Tegra-specific DVFS helper-driver that will help to manage CPU-CORE voltage dependency. Yet I'll have to examine this all in more details, but maybe it will be nicer if DVFS could be instantiated via device-tree as well. It will provide a Tegra-specific DVFS API and manage CORE / RTC dependencies for the CPUFreq and peripheral drivers, also helping to maintain proper voltages during kernel boot-up until all drivers are brought into action. cpufreq { compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-dvfs"; cpu-supply = <&cpu_vdd_reg>; core-supply = <&core_vdd_reg>; rtc-supply = <&rtc_vdd_reg>; }; So my question is: Is it possible to have device-tree nodes that solely describe firmware? Kernel drivers in this case.